Tuesday, February 19, 2008


I'm feeling disenfranchised!

Today begins early voting for the Texas primaries which will be held on March 4, 2008. I'm angry with Romney and Giuliani - why couldn't they have waited until all of us have had a chance to cast our vote before withdrawing? Texas isn't some podunk state (like Utah), we rank 2nd in the number of republican delegates. Yet, the republican primary is pretty much settled before we even get a chance to vote. Believe me - I'm going to remember this in 2012 - neither of those weenies deserves to be in the white house! Someone who is going to call it quits at the first sign of trouble is not someone I want to entrust our national security to.

In Texas, you do not register for a party - you declare you party affiliation by which primary you vote in. I've considered voting in the democrat's primary - at least my vote for a presidential candidate might actually count for something - too bad I don't want any of them in the white house.

McCain for president - whoop de doo.


Sean said...

I believe in the movie "Bruster's Millions" they hit upon an answer regarding political disenfranchisment....which was "none of the above."


Vanson said...

i'm secretly voting for Obama :)

Don't tell my family.

Abelard Enigma said...

In all honesty, I haven't totally ruled out the possibility of Obama getting a vote from me.

It would be the first time I haven't voted for the republican presidential candidate in ... ever.

But, there is precident - I once voted for Mark White, the democratic candidate for governor, because I didn't like Bill Clements (he was too much of a 'good ol boy')

Beck said...

The Primary system is broken. It is party-driven and forces good men out of the race. I have a European foreign-exchange student who wrote me questioning our process of electing a president and why some states vote earlier than others, why some have caucuses verses primaries, why some states are winner-take-all and others are not, what the electoral college is, etc. etc. Believe me, after trying to sort through all of her questions, I came to the conclusion that no one really knows how this system is supposed to work - it's gotten way to convoluted and WAAAYYY too long.

Beck said...

Further... why are Iowa and New Hampshire considered so "special" as to be "first" to make their choice of all candidates while Texas (or Utah) do not? Because of "tradition" or "that's the way it's always been done" isn't good enough anymore. What is the problem with a national primary? What is wrong with standarizing the distribution of delegates? Why is it so party-driven with behind-the-scenes deals and brokers? Why not simplify the costs of running a primary by just having it done nationally in September and then the national election in November and be done with it?

Why? Because it makes too much sense - that's why...

MoHoHawaii said...


If you do end up voting for Obama, especially in the upcoming March 4th primary, your vote won't be wasted..

Abelard Enigma said...

Why not simplify the costs of running a primary by just having it done nationally in September and then the national election in November and be done with it?

Whoa there pardner! You're sounding like one of them flaming liberals!

. . .

[blush] Oh